FFIM

FFIM is a non-profit organization devoted to promoting and preserving Maine's fisheries
It is currently September 24th, 2017, 4:31 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 19 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: River Flows
PostPosted: April 30th, 2017, 5:55 pm 
Offline
FFIM Addict

Joined: December 2nd, 2001, 1:00 am
Posts: 3463
Location: T3R11
The West Branch is chugging along at 9000 cfs. This is great as the flow from the sluiceway and the upper gates will suck smelt from the lake into the river. The smelt population up in Chesuncook is not great but it's been getting better and smelt in the river means bigger healthier Salmon. My many seasons on the river are coming to an end so hopeful we can get a couple good ones in.

_________________
You see that dimple way over there? Well I couldn't hit it with a cruise missile.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: River Flows
PostPosted: April 30th, 2017, 6:27 pm 
Offline
FFIMer

Joined: May 16th, 2013, 10:33 am
Posts: 86
Location: Norridgewock Maine
Went to Madison today to check on the Kennebec. Water in the trees, dropping though.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: River Flows
PostPosted: April 30th, 2017, 6:34 pm 
Offline
FFIM Addict

Joined: December 2nd, 2001, 1:00 am
Posts: 3890
Location: Lewiston
I understand the East Outlet is running at 11,000 fps.
Nobody's wading that anytime soon.

Dave M

_________________
"Fish the West every year. Life is short; and you'll be dead a long time." Chris Hutchins--2009


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: River Flows
PostPosted: May 1st, 2017, 12:32 pm 
Offline
FFIM-aholic

Joined: October 15th, 2003, 12:00 am
Posts: 1198
Location: Bangor
Drove over the Andro and the K twice on Saturday- Chocolate milk. The boom islands above 95 in Fairfield were just barely poking out....


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: River Flows
PostPosted: May 1st, 2017, 1:44 pm 
Offline
FFIM Addict

Joined: December 2nd, 2001, 1:00 am
Posts: 3463
Location: T3R11
West Branch is scheduled to hit 17000 today. Now that's some serious water.

_________________
You see that dimple way over there? Well I couldn't hit it with a cruise missile.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: River Flows
PostPosted: May 1st, 2017, 3:07 pm 
Offline
FFIMer

Joined: December 2nd, 2001, 1:00 am
Posts: 546
Location: Portland, ME
I hope Don Lamson put a few pics of the WB on the Chewonki FB page. That's got to be an impressive amount of H20. Tight lines


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: River Flows
PostPosted: May 1st, 2017, 4:32 pm 
Offline
FFIM Addict

Joined: December 2nd, 2001, 1:00 am
Posts: 3463
Location: T3R11
MickeyH wrote:
I hope Don Lamson put a few pics of the WB on the Chewonki FB page. That's got to be an impressive amount of H20. Tight lines


He's got some pictures up on FB. Sarah has some also, her's are better.

_________________
You see that dimple way over there? Well I couldn't hit it with a cruise missile.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: River Flows
PostPosted: May 1st, 2017, 5:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: December 5th, 2001, 1:00 am
Posts: 5094
Location: Manchester, ME
Here's May 2011 at a claimed 16,000 cfs.
[url]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=svyrH-4gK2Q[/url]

And May 2008 at "89,000 gallons per minute"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ub2o4wczTUE

If "89,000 gallons per minute" is accurate, that flow would be about 12000 cfs. (7.5 gallons per cubic foot)

Which is my way of saying, "There is high water around May 1 pretty often."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: River Flows
PostPosted: May 1st, 2017, 5:40 pm 
Offline
FFIM Addict

Joined: December 2nd, 2001, 1:00 am
Posts: 3463
Location: T3R11
A couple of pictures from the Eddy.

Attachment:
aa front lawn.jpg
aa front lawn.jpg [ 156.86 KiB | Viewed 1559 times ]


Attachment:
aa Eddy Cabin.jpg
aa Eddy Cabin.jpg [ 171.13 KiB | Viewed 1559 times ]


Attachment:
aa More Well Dam.jpg
aa More Well Dam.jpg [ 126.54 KiB | Viewed 1559 times ]

_________________
You see that dimple way over there? Well I couldn't hit it with a cruise missile.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: River Flows
PostPosted: May 2nd, 2017, 10:13 am 
Offline
FFIMer

Joined: December 2nd, 2001, 1:00 am
Posts: 546
Location: Portland, ME
http://www.h2oline.com/default.aspx?pg=si&op=235125

9000 CFS at Upper Dam...yikes


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: River Flows
PostPosted: May 3rd, 2017, 7:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: December 5th, 2001, 1:00 am
Posts: 5094
Location: Manchester, ME
Supposedly, one of the benefits of turning the headwaters of all our major rivers into storage and hydropower systems is that they reduce flooding. W.e are not experiencing major flooding anywhere that I know of, but here's a little bit of quick analysis, based on USGS data. All sites shown have at least 20 years of data. "Regulated" sites are within a few miles downstream of a major dam on a river with headwater lakes that are used as storage reservoirs. "Unregulated" sites have essentially natural flows--no storage dams upstream.

Maybe I am missing something, but it looks to me like the storage reservoirs are not helping reduce high spring flows, at least as currently managed with this year's (pretty wet) water conditions. It would be interesting to see whether that was different under pre-Brookfield management of these dams. It certainly seems to me like Brookfield has operated to fill the storage reservoirs as early as possible--by May 1 this year for most lakes--while back in the Union Water Power or Kennebec Water Power days we were more likely to see lakes reaching "full pond" in late May or June.

Here's the data:



Regulated sites:

St. Croix River, Vanceboro 566% of normal flow
Grand Lake Stream, 577%
Kennebec River, the Forks 415%
Dead River, Flagstaff 466%
Androscoggin, Errol 425%





Unregulated sites:

St. John River, 9 Mile Bridge 175% of normal flow
Aroostook River, Washburn, 188%
North Branch Penobscot, Pittston Farm 167%
Mattawamkeag River, Mattawamkeag 142%
Carrabasset River, 163%
Sandy River, Mercer, 163%
Spencer Stream, Flagstaff 161%
Diamond River, Wentworth Location 202%


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: River Flows
PostPosted: May 3rd, 2017, 8:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: December 5th, 2001, 1:00 am
Posts: 5094
Location: Manchester, ME
Supposedly, one of the benefits of turning the headwaters of all our major rivers into storage and hydropower systems is that they reduce flooding. W.e are not experiencing major flooding anywhere that I know of, but here's a little bit of quick analysis, based on USGS data. All sites shown have at least 20 years of data. "Regulated" sites are within a few miles downstream of a major dam on a river with headwater lakes that are used as storage reservoirs. "Unregulated" sites have essentially natural flows--no storage dams upstream.

Maybe I am missing something, but it looks to me like the storage reservoirs are not helping reduce high spring flows, at least as currently managed with this year's (pretty wet) water conditions. It would be interesting to see whether that was different under pre-Brookfield management of these dams. It certainly seems to me like Brookfield has operated to fill the storage reservoirs as early as possible--by May 1 this year for most lakes--while back in the Union Water Power or Kennebec Water Power days we were more likely to see lakes reaching "full pond" in late May or June.

Here's the data:



Regulated sites:

St. Croix River, Vanceboro 566% of normal flow
Grand Lake Stream, 577%
Kennebec River, the Forks 415%
Dead River, Flagstaff 466%
Androscoggin, Errol 425%





Unregulated sites:

St. John River, 9 Mile Bridge 175% of normal flow
Aroostook River, Washburn, 188%
North Branch Penobscot, Pittston Farm 167%
Mattawamkeag River, Mattawamkeag 142%
Carrabasset River, 163%
Sandy River, Mercer, 163%
Spencer Stream, Flagstaff 161%
Diamond River, Wentworth Location 202%


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: River Flows
PostPosted: May 11th, 2017, 5:56 pm 
Offline
FFIMer

Joined: August 23rd, 2010, 6:49 pm
Posts: 79
Location: Rangeley Plantation, mooselookmeguntic
Jeff,

I hold you in very high regard, but Have you "jumped" to this conclusion about Brookfield's water storage policies or is this backed by some detailed analysis? I mean we had a lot of rain in May on top of a water dense snow pack, of course the lakes are full. Imagine what the Androscoggins flows would be right now if 16,500 acre Mooselookmeguntic was not holding back it's full storage capacity of 198,000 acre feet of water? The previous year, did we even have a winter? Mooselook never really filled.

Are you sure your conclusion is sound? I have seen the Lake Level time series graphs on Mooselook. Longterm Averge vs Annual data for Brookfield. Didn't seem too bad. Don't know about the other lakes with Brookfield dams..

Tom


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: River Flows
PostPosted: May 12th, 2017, 2:20 am 
Offline
FFIM-aholic

Joined: February 14th, 2007, 1:00 am
Posts: 1195
Location: New Hampshire
I am not scientist, but it seems there are two options... hold it or move it. If you can't hold it, because you're full, then you have to move it I guess. I guess you could argue they should have moved more sooner, but that assumes their crystal ball was working.

_________________
"Fishermen...spending their lives in the fields and woods...are often in a more favorable mood for observing her, in the intervals of their pursuits, than philosophers or poets even, who approach her with expectation." - Thoreau


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: River Flows
PostPosted: May 12th, 2017, 10:04 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: December 3rd, 2001, 1:00 am
Posts: 2117
Location: N44.88305* W68.67206*
I think Jeff's observation is a valid one, for at least that moment in time - his premise is very simple: watersheds that contained dams that were presumably supposed to moderate flows, were raging out of control - and watersheds that are not dammed up were flowing within a good storm or 2 of their normal flows - and his data backs it up...

_________________
The best things in life...aren't things.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 19 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider] and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group